British Film Institute (BFI) Discussion Thread

[trobrianders]

Disclaimers aren't about warning anybody. They're about letting you know who's in control. That the supply side feels intimidated enough to attach them should worry you.

[CouncilSpectre]

I think I'd have more respect for Disney if they slapped that disclaimer in front of SONG OF THE SOUTH and actually presented it rather than continue to deny its existence. The first African-American academy award and the very definition of a film that should be conversed about and learned from when it comes to racial depictions, cliches and stereotypes.

[RossyG]

Originally Posted by tofurice

I'd rather a disclaimer than a censor

I’d rather neither.

[StarDestroyer52]

Originally Posted by CouncilSpectre

I think I'd have more respect for Disney if they slapped that disclaimer in front of SONG OF THE SOUTH and actually presented it rather than continue to deny its existence. The first African-American academy award and the very definition of a film that should be conversed about and learned from when it comes to racial depictions, cliches and stereotypes.

This, 100%.

[ophone]

What about the disclaimers that the opinions expressed on discs aren't the ones of the distributor?
(Edit: I had to reformulate.)

[NuXiaolin]

Originally Posted by trobrianders

Disclaimers aren't about warning anybody. They're about letting you know who's in control. That the supply side feels intimidated enough to attach them should worry you.

How's the view from Planet Crackpot?

[Anthony Thorne]

Originally Posted by StarDestroyer52

OMG, we have to read a disclaimer. Woe is me, the end is near.

Please don't be stupid.

Did you have to read the same disclaimer when you saw it in the theatre?

Is Takeshi Kitano happy about the message that says the distributor of his film doesn't approve of his work? I know they speak a foreign language over there but it's a fair question.

Sticking it on the back of the box would be fine. Playing it before the movie is grossly presumptive. I don't give a f*ck what the BFI approves of or aligns with and having the academic lecturer on feminist theory wander in and finger wave before the movie that I bought plays is beyond the f#cking pale. I approve of artists being able to create stories and depict them fictionally, and it's annoying but not surprising that the BFI ranks this goal less highly than scowling at the public who are buying the movies it releases.

[NuXiaolin]

I suspect the BFI, and Canal and so on, is doing a simple job of "covering one's ass." That it upsets the usual right-wing snowflakes on here never ceases to amuse me.

[OnlyJapantown]

Originally Posted by Anthony Thorne

Please don't be stupid.

Did you have to read the same disclaimer when you saw it in the theatre?

Is Takeshi Kitano happy about the message that says the distributor of his film doesn't approve of his work? I know they speak a foreign language over there but it's a fair question.

Sticking it on the back of the box would be fine. Playing it before the movie is grossly presumptive. I don't give a f*ck what the BFI approves of or aligns with and having the academic lecturer on feminist theory wander in and finger wave before the movie that I bought plays is beyond the f#cking pale. I approve of artists being able to create stories and depict them fictionally, and it's annoying but not surprising that the BFI ranks this goal less highly than scowling at the public who are buying the movies it releases.

You're going to do your noggin in trying to get this across. There is no way the people in this thread defending the disclaimer would tolerate one they disagreed with being attached to a film - they're fine with this disclaimer because it suits their view, and seemingly for a number of them makes them feel giddy with the thought of it annoying those they disagree with. The fact that it throws an artist under the bus and minimises the viewer's right to interpretation of a work of art is neither here nor there.

[Anthony Thorne]

Originally Posted by OnlyJapantown

The fact that it throws an artist under the bus

It does.

Originally Posted by OnlyJapantown

and minimises the viewer's right to interpretation of a work of art

It does that too. Well observed.

At any rate the Cineoutsider review notes the transfer on this one is actually a bit of a whiffer, so I'lll just get either the Japanese or Australian releases, since the BFI is a too-dark transfer with the ghosts of Malcolm Muggeridge and Mervyn Stockwood coming back from the grave to warn me I'll go to hell for wanting to watch the work of my favourite living Japanese filmmaker unmolested by a bunch of twits in the UK authoring a condescending, repellent sneer over the beginning of the movie.

[Anthony Thorne]

Originally Posted by NuXiaolin

That it upsets the usual right-wing snowflakes on here

I remember the video nasties scare and the banning of LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST here in Australia, and the victims of those weren't right wingers, so if you want to throw a jab at people who dislike creeping censorship, phrase it differently.

That noted you're probably right that they're covering their ass, but how many easily offended folk were likely to buy a violent Yakuza movie and be offended by the content? At any rate, they've packaged the work of a great filmmaker with a whoopee cushion of shit at the beginning because they were too cowardly to do otherwise. I'll look elsewhere for versions of this movie on home video.

[TheDot]

Disclaimers? The end is nigh!

(Or it's just a split second insert meant to cover themselves and the world keeps on spinning if I read it or don't.)

[drush9999]

I'd rather the disclaimer appear with the copyright notices and distributor logos when loading the disc, than sandwiched between selecting Play and the movie. Often select chapter 1 to avoid FBI warnings as it is.

[Guernica78]

Is there a legal requirement as to where the disclaimer has to appear?

It’s always frustrating when anything pops up before the film and you have to sit through it. I’ve got tons of DVDs that have long anti piracy warnings before the disc starts. Anyone remember those. Surprisingly long too.

[NuXiaolin]

Originally Posted by Guernica78

Is there a legal requirement as to where the disclaimer has to appear?

It’s always frustrating when anything pops up before the film and you have to sit through it. I’ve got tons of DVDs that have long anti piracy warnings before the disc starts. Anyone remember those. Surprisingly long too.

YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A CAR!!!...no, and I've already bought the DVD, so why are you telling me off about downloading it off the Interweb?

[Guernica78]

Originally Posted by NuXiaolin

YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A CAR!!!...no, and I've already bought the DVD, so why are you telling me off about downloading it off the Interweb?

Yeah, you can’t fastforward or skip either and if it’s something you watch frequently it drives you mad

[Cinematt]

Originally Posted by OnlyJapantown

You're going to do your noggin in trying to get this across. There is no way the people in this thread defending the disclaimer would tolerate one they disagreed with being attached to a film - they're fine with this disclaimer because it suits their view, and seemingly for a number of them makes them feel giddy with the thought of it annoying those they disagree with. The fact that it throws an artist under the bus and minimises the viewer's right to interpretation of a work of art is neither here nor there.

If I saw disclaimer that said 'this film is not racist or homophobic and as such doesn't align with the views of the distributor' I'd think it was pretty hilarious.
I thought the warning was weird, probably because I watch a lot of Japanese films and this is not near the top of the pile for racism, homophobia, and a litany of other sins that are not only depicted but often endorsed in them. But I also forgot about it about 3 seconds once the movie actually started, so it confuses me that people get so worked up about them.
Not sure how it throws the artist under the bus, the film does depict a lot of racist and homophobic views, that's not some weird interpretation they've thrown on it. Whether it endorses those is up to you to figure out.

You could also choose to interpret the disclaimer as the BFI saying 'hey snowflakes, we know it's racist, but that's art, you don't have to be a racist to watch it. We're not, and we still think it's worth selling, so get over it and don't come at us with any of your woke moaning'

[Cinematt]

Originally Posted by NuXiaolin

YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A CAR!!!...no, and I've already bought the DVD, so why are you telling me off about downloading it off the Interweb?

The best thing about those is it turns out they [allegedly] stole the music for that ad. The composer claimed he was commissioned to write it for a specific purpose, and that's all it was licensed for, and then it was taken and used unlicensed for that ad.

[havalina]

Originally Posted by Guernica78

Yeah, you can’t fastforward or skip either and if it’s something you watch frequently it drives you mad

Watched an old DVD recently and experienced one of them. Actually insane they used to do this. Buy film legally and you get a much worse experience than if you'd downloaded it and could just hit play.

-

re: current disclaimers. They should standardise having a QR code on the back of box that links to a disclaimer page for this kind of thing and guidance for parents etc. People who want to get this info can access it, people who don't care can ignore.

[Sifox211]

Originally Posted by havalina

Watched an old DVD recently and experienced one of them. Actually insane they used to do this. Buy film legally and you get a much worse experience than if you'd downloaded it and could just hit play...

Even worse was the "Johnny bought a pirate DVD to show his friends" one which shows some loser upsetting his friends at the poor quality of the disk. I wished I'd been able to do the flipside and have one showing someone putting in a legit studio disk and he and his friends having to wade through 15 minutes of forced trailers and legal notices before getting to a slow animated menu and then the film at last...

The icing on the cake would be when he accidentally hits the Stop button and to resume the film they have to sit through the whole 15 minutes again

This used to really happen folks